Meanwhile in Ukraine

[Dark_Blade]

- Ukrainian Police forces fired live rounds at the protesters in Kiev

destroying capital of your own country and say that you are fighting against the bandits dictatorship. throwing everything what can you throw in the riot police includes molotovs... ah ok... its a "protest". capturing the administrative buildings, trying to beat the police(well police was more effective at beating protestors but do not call them as agressors lol). demonstrators.

no matter what they was standing for. their actions was a crime and the law should work same to everyone so the most active "demonstrators" should be prisoned.

[Molly]

Well, yes, they are protesters. Their level of violence is something completely different.

Holding up a shield with "I am against it!" = protester.
Storming a building and laying waste to the interior while holding up a shield "I am against it!" = still a protester.

[Butan]

- Ukrainian Police forces fired live rounds at the protesters in Kiev
- Russian military troops crossed the sovereign borders of the Ukraine

How can you be so sure every live rounds were not fired by a third party? And then be sure those soldiers all come from the russian military force? In both case you purposedfully ignore possible scenarios that you have no sources of, because it fits your idea of how things went down.

I would remind you that before the scenario of EU/US politicians were doing some "behind the curtains" revolt support and that a 3rd party was shooting at protesters during the protests came up with some legitimity, those who claimed it was the case were called many things, so how can you be so sure you have all the keys here? You sound like you're just backpedalling to the closest border of certainty you can find after you have been proved wrong on so many cases.

I'm saying that knowing that the police was officially authorized to use live rounds, so there is a high chance at least one police officer chose to allow himself to fire, but you're not presenting any facts here.

If you really want to prove things so that we can debate further, you have to not just state what you think is true and be gone with it. A lot of people criticized me for the same exact reason, then when I tried to explain why it is it was not welcomed with warm thoughts 

- the current Ukrainian parliament members are the same regularly voted representatives they were before the protests

They are all the same person? Nothing changed at how they work? How legal was the ousting of the president by the parliament, and the appointing of a interim president/prime minister? How legal was the ousting of all pre-maidan supporters of Yanukovich in favor of other persons? No shortcuts were taken at all?
Someone who knows Ukrainian laws could answer.


Then of course my mandatory: if you find what happened in Kiev perfectly legal, I challenge you to find something illegal at what happened in Simferopol.

[Dark_Blade]

includes the attacking people inside? at the last day of the "peaceful protest" - 22nd february - there was a man killed by "protestors". it was a guard of something (i dont remember what) and he was the only man there... and this result. some people from the road ispection was killed at the 22-23 night because they wasnt letting some cars in Kiev. and it shouldnt be punished? I belive that at 22nd february protestors was using the firearms and there was many proofs of the items pretty similar to the real weapons.
protestors was using molotovs so they litterally tryed to kill the policemen. is it a simple protest?
I dont respect the previos government but people who was provocing protestors to the agressive actions deserves much less respect.
I'll repeat once more, I was watching the stream from maydan at the evening 22nd february. when the maydan was under siege. the things we can hear from tribune was simple and horrible. horrible lie and terrible provocation.
"LOOK AT THEM! THEY ARE UNDER PSYCHOTROP INJECTIONS!!11". wat???

// thanks for Serr. 22 february = 18 february

[serr]

Was going to comment "facts" that you posted but it is too difficult.
Way too emotional post with wrong dates, wrong order of events and in one place 100% lie.

[DaveUKR]

How can you be so sure every live rounds were not fired by a third party? And then be sure those soldiers all come from the russian military force? In both case you purposedfully ignore possible scenarios that you have no sources of, because it fits your idea of how things went down.

I would remind you that before the scenario of EU/US politicians were doing some "behind the curtains" revolt support and that a 3rd party was shooting at protesters during the protests came up with some legitimity, those who claimed it was the case were called many things, so how can you be so sure you have all the keys here? You sound like you're just backpedalling to the closest border of certainty you can find after you have been proved wrong on so many cases.

I'm saying that knowing that the police was officially authorized to use live rounds, so there is a high chance at least one police officer chose to allow himself to fire, but you're not presenting any facts here.

If you really want to prove things so that we can debate further, you have to not just state what you think is true and be gone with it. A lot of people criticized me for the same exact reason, then when I tried to explain why it is it was not welcomed with warm thoughts 



They are all the same person? Nothing changed at how they work? How legal was the ousting of the president by the parliament, and the appointing of a interim president/prime minister? How legal was the ousting of all pre-maidan supporters of Yanukovich in favor of other persons? No shortcuts were taken at all?
Someone who knows Ukrainian laws could answer.


Then of course my mandatory: if you find what happened in Kiev perfectly legal, I challenge you to find something illegal at what happened in Simferopol.

Well, we can discuss it. If you follow this logic, how can you be sure those shots were not made by aliens from Mars? I'm pretty sure both sides used guns. It's very doubtful that the majority of victims is a work of 3rd side as I witnessed live report of head surgeon there in military hospital who opened some info about bullets used to injure/kill both sides. Most of them were 3mm (flober useless bullets) and 5.45 (used by AK-74). Even with SBU using 7.62 AKS and snipers of Ukrainian police, 7.62 and 9mm (used by pistols) bullets were not that often. It doesn't say that sniper couldn't use 5.45 gun for sniping though, but it's doubtful. There are also records of communication between Ukrainian snipers which also indirectly proves that there was a 3rd side sniping but it also proves that Ukrainian snipers fired as well.

What do you mean "the same person"? Parliament of Ukraine is completely the same (like all 450 members are the same). "Ousting" the President by Ukrainian Parliament is completely legal and it's called impeachment, though they didn't do it as he ran away himself. In case when there is no functioning President his functions are transferred temporary to the head of Parliament (speaker of Parliament).

I don't see how you find this correlation with Crimea. I can hardly find anything that is not against the law in that story:
1. Self proclaimed leaders - against the law.
2. Separatism - against the law.
3. Local referendum - against the law, impossible due to Constitution.
4. Referendum to join other country/leave Ukraine - against the law, against Constitution.
5. Bypassing Ukrainian borders with military forces - against both Ukrainian and international laws, against Constitution.
6. Unauthorized movements of Russian soldiers outside their base in Sevastopol - against the military contract with Russia.

As I've said, Maidan protesters who used guns and Molotov cocktails are not any better than Crimean separatists. And I don't really feel a lot of compassion to those who died of a bullet while holding molotov cocktail. But the whole situation in Crimea is just horrible. Both Crimean self proclaimed leaders are 2 small images of Yanukovich: both of them have criminal past. Aksyonov has a criminal name "Goblin", used to be one of the leaders of mafia group called "Salem" (known not only to Crimeans but to the whole Southern Ukraine). Konstantinov had a construction business with company called Console that used a popular criminal scheme: you start building a huge house, you sell flats before you finish building and you never finish building it. Has almost 50 unfinished construction objects in Ukraine. Such people went to politics because they were afraid of chase from other bandits or police, because deputies had/have special rights.

[Dark_Blade]

seems I am failed at the dates of all those actions... at the dates but not at the events. btw may you tell when it was? at 18 or at 11? at 18 I think.

Serr, I really cant understand how can you be on the side of those vandals.

[Molly]

How can you be so sure every live rounds were not fired by a third party? And then be sure those soldiers all come from the russian military force? In both case you purposedfully ignore possible scenarios that you have no sources of, because it fits your idea of how things went down.

I would remind you that before the scenario of EU/US politicians were doing some "behind the curtains" revolt support and that a 3rd party was shooting at protesters during the protests came up with some legitimity, those who claimed it was the case were called many things, so how can you be so sure you have all the keys here? You sound like you're just backpedalling to the closest border of certainty you can find after you have been proved wrong on so many cases.

I'm saying that knowing that the police was officially authorized to use live rounds, so there is a high chance at least one police officer chose to allow himself to fire, but you're not presenting any facts here.

If you really want to prove things so that we can debate further, you have to not just state what you think is true and be gone with it. A lot of people criticized me for the same exact reason, then when I tried to explain why it is it was not welcomed with warm thoughts 



They are all the same person? Nothing changed at how they work? How legal was the ousting of the president by the parliament, and the appointing of a interim president/prime minister? How legal was the ousting of all pre-maidan supporters of Yanukovich in favor of other persons? No shortcuts were taken at all?
Someone who knows Ukrainian laws could answer.


Then of course my mandatory: if you find what happened in Kiev perfectly legal, I challenge you to find something illegal at what happened in Simferopol.

Actually, you try very hard to ignore facts.
There are freaking videos on youtube showing Police officers, next to Berkut dudes, shooting with real weapons.
There were troops crossing the border with the Russian flags on their uniform and vehicles.
Parliament members are the same people - that's what I wrote and ment. Where the heck did I write anything about "how they work"?

Blaming others not presenting facts and then deliberately ignore them is kinda annoying, Butan.
Writing a wall of text with random nonsense rambling and then pull something out of your ass of me being proven wrong... Jesus, there is just no point in discussing anything when you don't even read things properly.

[serr]

But I'm not on their side.

At least not on the side of people who were throwing molotovs and shooting police with firearms.
However those who came to maidan and didn't do those things I can understand and more or less support, though what they did was bad for Ukraine. They really should have waited till president elections.
As for those who did violent things... They are already bad enough. I don't see any point in making them worse with obvious lie or doubtful unconfirmed information. The same applies for other side though. Those who make some merciless monsters of police are not better.

[CrazyCracka420]

destroying capital of your own country and say that you are fighting against the bandits dictatorship. throwing everything what can you throw in the riot police includes molotovs... ah ok... its a "protest". capturing the administrative buildings, trying to beat the police(well police was more effective at beating protestors but do not call them as agressors lol). demonstrators.

no matter what they was standing for. their actions was a crime and the law should work same to everyone so the most active "demonstrators" should be prisoned.

Never heard of a false flag (or black flag) operation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/03/everyone-agrees-ukraine-sniper-attacks-false-flag-argue-culprit.html

[Dark_Blade]

but the leaders!the leaders of both sides who letted all this happened? from the ex-government - got punished... from the maydan? ...

and lets remember - all this started from the "we want to keep the way in EU". so it wasnt anything about corruption etc.  people was standing there because someone said that EU iz gud and thats all. maybe few arguments without explaination.

and thats why I dont see any reason to blame russia in the things are going on. what can I say about annexation part of the country if here was change of the government without elections.

(click to show/hide)

in my opinion - your motherland and your country are different things. Crimea was always pro-russian. sure it wasnt 95% from 80% of population but only the blind person can doubt that its more than 50%.
the question with Crimea is comming up at every president and government elections so the only trouble is unmarked russian soldiers.

the only thing why I dislike russian actions is destabilisating. ofc the bullshit was started at december... but even the bloodshed in the Kiev wasnt as important as all this.


//
I am talking not about snipers. demonstrators with weapons was showed even in our news ... and even on pro-maydan channels. sure they doubt that it really was firearms but I dont.

[serr]

seems I am failed at the dates of all those actions... at the dates but not at the events. btw may you tell when it was? at 18 or at 11? at 18 I think.

Yes, 18.
As for events you posted:

some people from the road ispection was killed at the 22-23 night because they wasnt letting some cars in Kiev

They were killed inside Kiev and the reason you wrote is obviously wrong. Aye, they could be killed by "protesters" but just as well it could be some criminals not connected with maidan who just used unstable situation for their own purposes.

there was a man killed by "protestors". it was a guard of something (i dont remember what) and he was the only man there...

That was office of Party of Regions and that party was the only source of information about that killing and its circumstances. Though in this particular case it is quite believable to be truth, I wouldn't call them honest reliable source of information, rather the opposite.

I dont respect the previos government but people who was provocing protestors to the agressive actions deserves much less respect.

Now that's very arguable statement.
I believe that main provocator was Yanukovich himself, I just don't understand why every time protests were about to die because of lack of action he was reigniting it with new power.

[Dark_Blade]

I believe that main provocator was Yanukovich himself, I just don't understand why every time protests were about to die because of lack of action he was reigniting it with new power.

lol
Yanukovich was doing as active as our government now. he wasnt giving the orders to kick the maydan out of there and was talking about negotiations and its obviouslly not that what people was waiting for. Maydan wanted him to give up, people who was against it wanted to hear something brutal... but he was doing litterally nothing. unlike the maydan leaders.
btw every time that conflict was becomming harder because of demonstrators actions.
the only one exception is that night when students was beaten(but there are some rumors about provocations from radicals. belive it or dont belive it is the individual choise for everyone because its the secret covered in the fog of the history).

[serr]

Well, probably that is how you see it.
It looks very different to me. To me, actions of protesters were very predictable, they never, not even one time did anything unexpected.

And Yanukovich(or someone from his team) had to predict them and handle(as I said it wasn't really difficult),
What they did however - they tried to disperse protests when they could just ignore them, ignored them when they had to reach a compromise(yes, they made some offers, but those offers were nearly impossible to accept) and were making concessions when protesters tried to use force.

That way they simply showed that peaceful protests won't achieve anything, except that some protesters could be beaten or jailed, while violent actions could achieve results, what actually happened in the end

[Dark_Blade]

should it be achived if its not resonable enough?
what kind of compromise are you talking about? some protesters said things like "we will stay here till the end!"... till the end of what?
since Yanukovich accepted that russian offer there was no way in compromise because maydan wanted to take all the power like it actually did.
lets remember 18 february. pro-western side blocked the work of the government and protestors wanted to capture it aswell... the thing is there was kinda more police than there should be.
at 18 february parlament was going to vote for some points with which both sides can agree... but we know what happened.